The meeting that Hines is hosting to inform the citizens about their proposed plans for the Ensor Property (south end) is NOT at Carson Nature Center. The meeting has been moved to Hudson Gardens at 6:30 and not 6:00. For those that don’t get the change, someone from Hines will be at Carson to redirect people to Hudson Gardens.

Community Conversation has been scheduled for Dec. 1st, 7:00pm at the Connections Room at 6520 S Broadway (just a couple doors south of Solid Grounds in the South Fellowship Church Center). Doors will be unlocked at 6:45 and meeting will end at 8:30. The subject for the evening will be Columbine Square.

If you are wondering:

-what is the connection between Columbine Square and the Columbine Square Urban Renewal (UR) Plan,
-how did Columbine Square get in the condition it is in today,
-how our tax dollars can be diverted to subsidize the redevelopment of Columbine Square,
-where do those tax dollars come from,
-what is B-2 zoning and what does it have to do with Columbine Square redevelopment,
-what happens if the Columbine Square UR Plan is repealed,
-what happens if the UR Authority (LIFT) is abolished,
-do citizens have any voice in the redevelopment of Columbine Square,
-do the Englewood citizens have a voice,
-what happens on Dec. 6th regarding the future of Columbine Square?

We will attempt to answer all these questions and more. Come prepared with your questions.

We are on the final leg of our Food Drive for the 244th Heavy Artillery Army Reserve Families. Please show your support for the troops and bring something for them in the way of non-perishable food items. They are in need and cannot ask for help. They are so grateful for anything we provide from food items to disposable diapers to shampoo. What a small price to pay for what they do for us.

Community Conversation this Thursday night – October 13 at the Connections Room, 6520 S Broadway. Doors open at 6:45 and meeting is 7:00- 8:30 pm.

Many times the community only sees the tip of the iceberg with new development projects in Littleton. What has the developer done to get his project in front of the Planning Commission and the City Council? What role does staff play in the process? Do the citizens of Littleton play a part in the process?

Jocelyn Mills, Littleton’s Director of Community Development, will be the guest speaker to talk about the zoning process from a developer’s point of view. What does a developer have to do to get a building permit? What is a “use by right” and how is the process different from a rezoning requirement?

Monday, a motion to reconsider was filed in the case of Burkett vs. City of Littleton and Zocalo. We have asked Judge Horton to take a second look at the reasoning applied when deciding in Littleton’s favor. The defendants have a week to respond to our motion and we will have a week to reply to their arguments against us. So, the motion and responses will be before the judge by September 26th. Colorado Rules of Civil Procedure allow up to 63 days for the judge to reconsider and decide. At the very latest, by November 28th we may have a new answer from the Court.

As a reminder, we asked the Court to determine Littleton’s code allows an appeal of site development plans to the Board of Adjustment and therefore the Court should order the City to allow the hearing. The City argued that the code did not allow the appeal as two sections of code seem to conflict. We are arguing the Judge should have chosen the more constitutional reading which would have allowed due process to the neighboring property owners through a BOA hearing. Here is an excerpt from the motion to reconsider that gets to the heart of the matter:

“… SDP determinations are a quasi-judicial act to which constitutional due process protections automatically attach. The City cannot simply insulate its quasi-judicial actions from meaningful notice, hearing, and review. Therefore, if the LMC does not afford Plaintiff notice and a hearing (e.g., through the Board’s appeal process), it would be unconstitutional and the City will have violated Plaintiff’s constitutional due process rights. Because the Court must presume the LMC is constitutional and choose a constitutional interpretation over an unconstitutional one where possible, the Court erred in choosing the latter.”

Although Littleton processed the Grove project administratively, technically their action was quasi judicial. The legal test for distinguishing quasi-judicial acts from administrative acts is to determine whether discretion was exercised in the decision. The rules governing site plan approvals (Code section 10-7) include a number of discretionary findings, such as whether or not adverse impacts on adjacent property are mitigated or eliminated. In fact, the City itself admitted that their decision was quasi-judicial in its motion to dismiss, paragraph 16.

There will be a number of people who will argue we should “get over it” and let this issue go. We cannot. Many property owners in Littleton have only the zoning code to rely on for the regulation of development. When the zoning code is arbitrarily applied and neighbors are blocked from having a zoning decision reviewed, it adds an undesirable layer of risk to property ownership in Littleton. The Board of Adjustment must be made available as an avenue to review administrative zoning decisions; the board serves as an important check & balance to ensure that zoning decisions are made fairly. The continuation of this case should ultimately ensure that right.

That being said, Advocates for Littleton is still accepting donations toward the legal battle. Donations can be made through our online fundraiser at www.gofundme.com/fightthegrove or by mail to:

Advocates for Littleton

PO BOX 620253

Littleton, CO 80162

Thank you again for your continued interest in this case.

Advocates for Littleton

PS – There appears to be misinformation spreading that the judge’s ruling declared that there were no zoning violations. To date, no opinion of the Grove’s zoning interpretations has been given (other than the city itself stating that it was a lawful use). The Littleton Awake group incorrectly reported the judge’s ruling to mean that Littleton had done no wrong in approving the Grove. Again, that was NOT the outcome. The judge only sided with Littleton’s interpretation that an appeal of the decision was not allowed. We are hoping that after additional clarification, the judge will change his mind. Only then can the zoning issues surrounding the Grove’s approval be examined ruled upon.

A committee has been established to review the zoning code documents for a over-haul to streamline, update and modernize our zoning codes. This is the document the group is working from as presented by the consultants from Clarion Associates.